Incorrect access to tcp_info in puffer_ttp.cc about puffer HOT 4 CLOSED

I don't think & is the issue: Each media server of Puffer is single-threaded running a single process, so the execution is sequential and pretty straightforward to reason about. client_.tcp_info().value() returns a struct TCPInfo containing just five integers, and curr_tcp_info simply holds a reference to this struct. Removing & will cause an extra copy of five integers, no big deal, but shouldn't affect the correctness.

Could you please double check the symptom on your side? That is to output, say, curr_tcp_info.cwnd before and after removing the &, without making any other changes. Regardless of this, we definitely want to hear more about why Fugu doesn't work as expected! Although we can't guarantee Fugu working in simulation (re: our research paper), we still want to eliminate mysterious behaviors of it and understand it better.

from puffer.

Thanks for your advice! Actually, I just pulled the latest Puffer and re-tried it once more. The error is gone now. I agree with what you said that removing & shouldn't make a difference. But I couldn't figure out the reason of the unexpected behavior previously. Anyways, good news that it's not there any more. Thanks again!

from puffer.

Hello ---------- Sorry, we didn't quite get your problem. Did you mean that the value curr_tcp_info.delivery_rate/cwnd/... might not equal to client_.tcp_info().value().delivery_rate/cwnd/...?

from puffer.

Yes.

Actually, in my experiments, I capped the network bandwidth to different values but the video format was always selected as the top one (1920x1080-22), even though there were frequent long rebuffering events happened, especially for the very first chunk. Then I printed out tcp-level information and found curr_tcp_info.delivery_rate/cwnd/... are not the expected tcp-level information (i.e. client_.tcp_info().value().delivery_rate/cwnd/...). That's why I think TTP couldn't predict proper transmission time for next video chunks.

After I remove & from const auto & curr_tcp_info = client_.tcp_info().value();, now it seems that puffer could adapt to different network bandwidth.

Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks!

from puffer.